I noticed students at the school where I teach starting to use the word "random" about a couple of years ago. Eventually I quizzed them about it.
What exactly did it mean?
Someone is being random when they say something absurd or illogical or unpredictable, out of the blue. You can dress random, say something that is random, or be random. The common refrain is "Oh, that's so random!"
This adjective has positive connotations. It's good to be random. Being random makes friends laugh. It is aspired to, sought after. 'Tis the pinnacle, the holy grail.
Not a bad thing at all.
Egalitarian.
When I was at school there were formulas to be followed to gain acceptance and reward from friends. I resisted this as I did any hegemony.
But now, so long as you say or do something unpredictable, unconnected, left of centre, you have a reasonable chance of applause.
By now the word "postmodernism" is very well known. The great metanarrative provided by the Enlightenment, made possible by certain Christian presuppositions, fueled by natural resources, predicated on the plausibility of unlimited growth, optimistic & rational & empirical by nature, wide in vision & ambition, has fragmented.
Bloody postmodernism. That which presumes itself to be new. Big Kev's Universal Solvent.
We now live in a melting pot where all you've got is melted cheese, and lots of it. It's insipid, but variety is still craved, providing it is not taken seriously.
Enter randominity.
It makes it very equitable for youth who seek approval. But the approval is earnt by acts of absurdity.
The French came up with absurdity long before it became in vogue in the anglo-West. The results in France might be what's in store for us:
- materialism
- superstition
- rise of cults
France is socialist and I wonder if this has become a means of cohesion for their society. There will have to be a counterpart in Australia, although I doubt it is, or will be, socialism.
One fear I have is that without the social cohesion provided by a metanarrative, the most powerful social dynamic will be economic. Otherwise put, pragmatic & tendency to selfishness. This is capitalism unrestrained, but I don't know where it will lead to. I suppose I mean materialism but that's nothing new.
I recently had cause to doubt my pessimism when I read that historically speaking, governments have more power in comparison to large corporations than has been the case in the recent past. The East India Company was cited as an example. This makes the FTA with America look less radical in relative terms. I'm still uninformed about the value of the FTA. I read a book recently defending "Keynesian" economics which I think means that the government holds onto and exploits its powers to sheperd the economy.
And every generation has profound anxieties about the future.
Maybe the word "random" is just a reflection of flexibility and the ability to improvise.
Time will tell.
